I hate hate hate the net phrasing "...wait for it..."because it always signifies a weak snark ahead. It's high school hallway humor, to be followed by a hundred Heathers murmuring agreement, Good one, Nicole.

Nicole, some advice from someone far funnier than you: "Wit has truth in it; wisecracking is simply calisthenics with words."and "I know that there are things that never have been funny, and never will be. And I know that ridicule may be a shield, but it is not a weapon."Dorothy Parker

The difference between the Althouse blog and the leftosphere: you're willing, as a last resort, to delete comments that are disagreeable - disagreeable, not comments that simply disagree - and uncivil. They're unwilling to let comments stand if they disagree. I wasn't the commenter who tried to defend you over there (it seems to me that when I get involved in such things, I get angry and it gets counterproducive), but I've had similar experience many times. With the exception of some of the leftie feminist blogs that have been so unpleasent to you (they sometimes allow dissenting voices, if one is very focussed and very carefully-written), they just don't tolerate dissent in Left Blogistan. With this in mind, I find it hilarious that they accuse you of being thin-skinned.

With the exception of some of the leftie feminist blogs that have been so unpleasent to you (they sometimes allow dissenting voices, if one is very focussed and very carefully-written), they just don't tolerate dissent in Left Blogistan.

But, for the record, the GOP propaganda about the stage being the Acropolis-meets-Stonehenge also turned out to be false. It was a good stage, and the backdrop when the camera focused in on Obama worked well aesthetically. No chickens being sacrificed to Zeus on that stage.

But, for the record, the GOP propaganda about the stage being the Acropolis-meets-Stonehenge also turned out to be false. It was a good stage, and the backdrop when the camera focused in on Obama worked well aesthetically. No chickens being sacrificed to Zeus on that stage.

So then what's the definition of uncivil, Simon? Your indulging in murder/death fantasies of the commenter "Harvard" or his making Althouse feel like a little person by calling her inane/unscholarly and unimportant - before she deleted his comments?

Think about this whole episode in the context of that.

Sometimes the idea of respect gets tied up in the concept of paying homage to someone's ego. Actually, this is a very easy thing to do. And tonight just may prove that.

Well Simon, at least you're being honest. But since Professor Althouse obviously believes you're capable of legitimate debate (apparently I must not be), and not just being her pet (which is different from a troll), perhaps we could debate what makes referring to someone's publication record a "smear"? I didn't research that topic, but I notice that it wasn't refuted when "Harvard" noted absences in someone's publication record. Is this what was assumed to be "vicious language" or a "smear"? If I'm ignorant as to why that should be the case, the civil thing to do would be to enlighten me as to why. Someone mentioned a willingness to be corrected...

I'm going to assume that this isn't going to go much further. Lucyoldson is a commenter to be proud of, understandably, but not may answers coming out of her! Anyway, you can bash an alleged unwillingness to tolerate dissent elsewhere. But I'm not sure of what to make of an unwillingness to even entertain an honest question - assuming that's what's occurring.

No offense intended.

If the questions offend you, Simon - or anyone else, I apologize. I'm just not sure I understand why they should. Or why anyone would assume that they should.

Just remember, Obama is totally for the bill of rights and ensuring people can fully practice their civil rights. (Yes, it's a private site, but Obama is suing to stop the Ayers video. So who's trampling on freedom of speech here?)

I'm starting to really love the local NOLA blogosphere, which is mostly left-progressive but also a wide-open range for all and sundry. Comments threads are full of disagreement, but it's good natured, and many of the folks on opposing sides know and like each other.

I think I mentioned earlier that many of those bloggers lodged angry comments at Kos over the wishful thinking for a hurricane to blow over New Orleans because it would inconvenience the GOP convention -- we're not afraid of internal fights here. I would be appalled if their Kos comments were deleted or the commenters banned, and I am dismayed by that being the case at Crooks and Liars. Shame on them. I've found some of Nicole Belle's posts poorly argued and biased, and posted as much there. I wasn't banned or deleted for doing so, and that's how it ought to be.

But I also don't have much admiration for Ann's thread on that so-called Greek temple. Ann, your "cruel neutrality" doesn't get you off the hook for accountability. If you're going to parrot every nasty attack the right makes on Obama and offer no more than a "hey, maybe it's true, maybe it's not" disclaimer, then you ought not to be surprised when some of us call foul on that. The Greek Temple thing was crap, you bought into it, your commenters had a lot of fun making mockery of Obama based on it, and then it turned out, surprise, surprise, to be horseshit.

If you were likewise posting complete bullshit about McCain, I'd buy the cruel neutrality line. But you're not. You're waiting for something perfectly witty and just so. Your credibility is shaky here.

Oooh! I see Maxine's back. Hey, Maxine, Bob's got the hots for you. He always stops in West LA after a trip to San Berdoo to score some shards. Althouse may sleep, but Bob NEVER sleeps, if you get my drift.

Ann, your "cruel neutrality" doesn't get you off the hook for accountability. If you're going to parrot every nasty attack the right makes on Obama and offer no more than a "hey, maybe it's true, maybe it's not" disclaimer, then you ought not to be surprised when some of us call foul on that.

Oh please spare us. The constant complaining and cries for justice. Obama is such a pussy. He can't take anything.

The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos' National Football League team plays.

Some 80,000 supporters will see Obama appear from between plywood columns painted off-white, reminiscent of Washington's Capitol building or even the White House, to accept the party's nomination for president.

So is this stage set going to seem like a Greek temple, with Obama as some phony god — from somewhere in Europe — or is it going remind us of the federal government — with Obama looking simply presidential? It's makes a big difference, and you never know what these rock concert type structures are going to look like until you see them in action.

Please tell me what is wrong with writing this, given the information provided?

Because ladies and gentlemen, if all this this vitriol towards a blogger was spewed FOR A PODIUM DESIGN, what on earth are we going to get for 4-8 years of an entire Obama presidency?

I'll quote part of what zerovoice said..."AA - I agree that Nicole Belle's attack was unfair (assuming you quoted it correctly, as I do) and that her decision not to "dignify" you with a link does suggest the possibility of an attempt to deceive (albeit a ham-handed one as presumably most readers know how to get to your site).

"Although I think it might have been a better tactical choice for you to spend more time live-blogging Gore's speech and less time attacking Nicole Belle, I certainly understand why you are chose the course you did."

Sorry, Revenant. You quoted too. I agree with you that the post I deleted was an expression of feeling and not something that would be acted on, I still think it isn't good to have it up there. It doesn't need to be there, and I think Simon will probably agree with me that it should be taken down.

If you're going to parrot every nasty attack the right makes on Obama and offer no more than a "hey, maybe it's true, maybe it's not" disclaimer

Reuters is "the right"? When the hell did that happen? Was it before or after they declared that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"?

Reuters -- a left-leaning wire service -- wrote a story claiming the set would look like a miniature Greek temple. ABC News -- a left-leaning news service -- printed the story, and Ann quoted it. At what point did that consist of "parroting a nasty attack from the right"?

Revenant, I don't think I do. That "Greek Temple" thing went viral from Reuters once it landed on Drudge, and from there to most of the rightwing blogs. Ann's post was just one of the many, hence my calling it parroting.

Much of the Obama coverage has been negative, even from what you call leftwing, or MSM, media. Ann uncritically repeats this story, but calls bias on the media for their treatment of McCain with regularity. I don't apologize for finding her credibility lacking in this regard.

Beth, it's wrong to say I was parroting or taking any cues. I was picking up a story from Reuters and giving my original opinion. The Greek temple description was in Reuters, not some right-wing blog meme.

Ann, I'll take your word for it that you got it from Reuters, not Drudge. But it did become a right-wing blog meme, and your thread was part of that zeitgeist. I look forward to some equally offtrack, cruelly neutral mocking of McCain on your blog. I'm hoping for a pony for Christmas, too.

Don't scoff me for my naive and hopeful attitude -- Gustav appears to be tracking west of us so anything is possible!

Trooper, she might want to keep an eye on the projections. I think Baton Rouge might end up closer to the center of things than we are. Nothing's clear until it actually enters the Gulf, sometime late Friday or early Saturday. I've changed from expecting to evacuate to getting ready to spend a day or two without power while places west of us get pounded.

That bum Shockey didn't played a single down in preseason. I am starting to think we got taken by some sort of Yankee fast one, that the Giants knew his leg was not healing and now we've wasted a 2nd round pick. No big loss, though. We have receivers to spare, but a tight end would be useful (now there's something we might all agree on.)

Where I come from, events like Series X, even if phrased as "hopes" and even if supposedly meant as "jokes," are taken seriously. I'm actually rather surprised that AA apparently doesn't take them very seriously. I seriously wonder if she is exposing herself to liability risk here, especially if Simon acts in a manner consistent with Event Series X.

Beth, there have been countless opportunities to mock McCain over the past few months, and Ann hasn't bothered to post on any of them because "Obama is more interesting" to her. She can't risk mocking McCain because it will offend 95% of her commenters. The best you'll get is maybe a post mocking someone else who is mocking McCain.

That "Greek Temple" thing went viral from Reuters once it landed on Drudge, and from there to most of the rightwing blogs. Ann's post was just one of the many, hence my calling it parroting.

Even if Ann got it from a right-wing blog (which she did not), you've zero basis for calling it an "attack from the right". It's right there in the Reuters article: "miniature Greek Temple". No smear, no right-wing spin, no right wing propaganda. Just pure, run-of-the-mill bad journalism from Reuters. Just because a bunch of conservative blogs repeated a news story from a left-wing source doesn't automagically transform it into "an attack from the right", especially considering that Ann expressed more skepticism than the original Reuters story itself did.

Besides which, you claimed Ann "parrots" every attack the right makes on Obama. That's not even remotely true and you know it; Ann's posts completely ignore the overwhelming majority of right-wing anti-Obama memes, although most of them do show up in the comments eventually. To give one obvious example, Ann has stated that she doesn't think Obama's past association with Ayers is a big deal and has faulted Obama only for bringing it up himself in an ad. Which "right-winger" is she "parroting" there -- Joe Biden?

Much of the Obama coverage has been negative, even from what you call leftwing, or MSM, media.

In the sense that "much" of the American electorate thinks Bush has done an awesome job, sure. In the sense that you're trying to imply that the coverage of Obama has been *mostly* negative, I can only assume you're confused as to who Obama is. The old white guy is *McCain*; Obama's the younger black guy news anchors have been wanking themselves raw over since January.

Trooper, I feel good about the city and state preparations this time. I'll have to take a ride through the Quarter tomorrow and get a look at things there. I'm glad she won't be sleeping in her store!

I had a Hanson's snoball today (nectar cream, with ice cream in the middle) and spent a few minutes chatting with an old guy pushing a basket full of junk down the street while I enjoyed my wonderful icey treat. I don't think he was homeless, just one of those old fellows who make their way by doing little odd jobs around the neighborhood. He told me he's keeping up with the storm plans by checking his little cell phone for news (he proudly displayed that to me, I guess to let me know he wasn't a bum) and watching the TV at the laundromat and the Lion's Club (he likes to play a little pool and have a soda there). Anyway, he knows all about where to go to catch the bus if we have to evacuate. So apparently the word is out on the street and plans are working. He's exactly the kind of person who ended up at the Dome last time, so this is a good sign.

Someone told me that Obama picked Joe Biden as Vice President. That can't be right can it? I mean of all the people in the world he had to pick that guy?

Biden is one of the more credible Democrats on foreign-policy issues, particularly since they threw Lieberman under the bus. He helps balance out Obama's habit of responding to Russian invasions by calling on "both sides" to stop the violence.

"Spare us the bullshit, Zero. You know you're lying, we know you're lying, Ann knows you're lying... give it up, already. Nobody threatened you; nobody fluent in English would have felt threatened. Grow up or fuck off already."

First of all, you are violating AA's rule against referring to Event X specifically. It will be interesting to see how AA responds to this situation.

Second, I never asserted that I felt threatened. Unless you wish to embarrass yourself further, read and understand what you are talking about. Also, please refrain from using childish and vulgar terms in addressing me. I don't call your posts "bullshit" or tell you to "fuck off." Please return the courtesy.

Revanant, I would find it hard to place you in a category, and I never think of you as conservative, particularly. At least not as a social conservative.

But Ann's commenters, even if they're not as gushy about McCain as, say, Victoria, is, are still on board. It's more that the Obama mocking sells here, not that McCain is sacrosanct. But if you do mock him here, expect to be reminded, and damned quickly, that he was a POW for five years, where he had no house!

So, I stand by my assessment: there's no cruel neutrality. Ann has a finely honed sense of what keeps the blog rolling.

Obviously there are more facets to her, and to the blog: otherwise, why would I be here?

Dude Biden isn't credible on anything up to and including his haircut. The man has cheated and plagerized on everything from the SAT's to his last pap smear. He make Pinnochio look like Honest Abe. I mean no offense, but can't they come up with someone else?

Hey, please know I didn't mean to threadjack. I just couldn't believe this Biden thing, but what are you gonna do. Let's go back to talking about reality.

Do you think Santa is gonna use a Prius this year? I know he want's to go green.

Ann's posts completely ignore the overwhelming majority of right-wing anti-Obama memes, although most of them do show up in the comments eventually.

That's exactly in line with my view of her blog as performance art. Her comments are aimed at sparking a response in the comments. I thought her "maybe he's a god, maybe he's looking presidential" disclaimer was weak. She knew which way the thread comments would tack. That's the point -- she's all about her audience. Again, I think it's brilliant.

If the media mentions Obama more than McCain, it doesn't mean they're fawning over him, that the references aren't negative.

I would start by not requesting, as Obama did, that the *invaded* country stop being so violent.

If you mean "how would I resolve the situation", I don't think there's anything the United States can do to resolve it. We're not going to pick a fight with another nuclear power and nobody in the world cares enough about Georgia for an anti-Russian sanctions regime to work. But a good, solid condemnation of Russian imperialism wouldn't hurt any.

Beth, the study in question surveyed a period of time where McCain had the nomination sewn up (and thus wasn't being much talked about) and Clinton and Obama were still at each other's throats. Given that there are plenty of Clinton toadies in the MSM it is hardly surprising that Obama had to endure a certain amount of negative coverage from Hillary supporters during that time, although there was still an embarrassing amount of fawning.

Since he wrapped up the nomination, though, there hasn't been a significant negative story about him in the MSM. They dropped the story of his decades-long association with loony racists like a hot potato once Hillary was out of the race, for example.

LOL, Beth -- the ones reminding us about McCain's POW tenure are the garage mahal types, doing it ironically, or whatever.

McCain ain't all that, but he's a lot more than Obama. I've lived in AZ for more than 14 years and never once have I voted for McCain. I find it funny that I may actually do so for the first time this November. I haven't decided yet whether I'll even cast a vote for the president.

I think the content of Ann's blog reflects the ineptitude of the Obama campaign. McCain's people are putting out all sorts of on-target ads, toga recommendations, what have you -- stuff that's funny and fun to talk about, as well as being substantive. The stuff that Obama puts out is boring.

What I really want to see is the stuff Kurtz is digging up on Obama, Ayers, and the Chicago Annenburg Challenge coming to light in a big way. The CAC is really the only executive experience that Obama has ever had, and all the evidence points to millions squandered with nothing to show for it. Obama's camp sent out an "action memo" to try and beat Kurtz off the air. Ann blogged their attempt to keep the Ayers' ad off the air, which was bad enough -- but now we know it wasn't a one-off, with how they've responded to Kurtz.

the ones reminding us about McCain's POW tenure are the garage mahal types, doing it ironically, or whatever.

The only time I remember seeing it mentioned seriously in his defense here was as an explanation for his behavior during the 70s. The much more common response is something along the lines of "yes, McCain stinks on that issue but Obama is worse".

Joan, I expect we'll see what comes out of the Ayers' thing, whether it's from Kurtz or someone else. Why are you surprised they finally got done with the Rev. Wright? What's new to come out of that? You've heard of beating a dead horse, surely.

As for the POW thing, I heard it not from garage mahal but from almost the entire conservative contingent here, anytime I made even the slightest reference to honorable Senator McCain's cheating on his wife and marrying the rich mistress. Apparently, you need a brand new wife if you've been a POW. And it's okay to pick one out while you're still married to the first one. I know, I know! I shouldn't be so judgemental.

Just a thought, but I bet the same exact commenters had a hey-day with that same meme with John Kerry. Suddenly, being a kept man isn't as funny as it was four years ago. Why? Because McCain was a POW, I'm guessing. Anyway, Joan, pay attention. It's not the left playing the POW card. It's McCain. Pretty much every day.

Well her sister Ali is about 14 and just had breast enhancements on the family reality show. Now if Althouse was on the ball, we would have a bunch of threads on that instead of this political bullshit.

And how the hell was the kid named Ali anyway? Is she a Muslin too?

They didn't even have the decency to make it her middle name.

But look at this way, with a Muslin name and ridiculous plastic surgery she combines the best part of the Democratic Ticket. And she's a girl. She can run for President in 2036 against Paris Hilton. That's hot!

I didn't say I was surprised. I expected them to drop the story. He's a Democrat, after all. Compare the front-page smear piece on John McCain's apocryphal "relationship" with a lobbyist a decade ago to the utter failure to report VP contender John Edwards getting caught in a motel with his mistress. That's how this stuff goes.

What's new to come out of that?

Well, a short list of questions Barack Obama never answered:

(1): Why he attended the church(2): How he reconciled the church's black liberation theology, with its neo-Marxist roots and overt racism, with his purported belief in "getting beyond race".(3): Why Jeremiah Wright was invited to join his campaign(4): Why he still belongs to the church, even after being shown all the nasty sermons he claims to have previously been unaware of(5): How, exactly, he was unaware of those sermons, which were included in a DVD collection of Wright's "best sermons" from the period Obama attended the church.

You've heard of beating a dead horse, surely.

And of ignoring the elephant in the room.

If John McCain had spent decades attending a church which espoused the belief that the duty of God was to advance the white race, exactly how soon would the media have gotten tired of talking about it? At a rough estimate, 2045. Hell, you still occasionally see stories about how Bush's granddad was mixed up with Nazis.

The problem with the temple thing--which I figured was just absurd--is that it was plausible. (Well, not all that plausible, because however they feel about BHO, the DNC can't be that tone-deaf.) But it fits in with the media adulation and screaming fans.

Hands down the most remarkable thing about either candidacy is the adoration of BHO. No contest. The candidates are otherwise unremarkable from what I see.

Revenant, the McCain analogy is weak. The white race doesn't need advancing; we're pretty much comfortably in charge still. I just don't see the lurking menace in the Obama's church history, and there's a huge difference between black liberation theology and the Aryan Nation/Christian Identity movement.

In any case, now that the race proper is underway, don't you think that will crop up again, if it looks like a useful point of attack for McCain? He's doing awfully well at coming up with good ads, so if he wants that topic in the media, he can make it happen.

Beth, I agree that McCain's people have been throwing out the POW card way too often lately. It was a lame response to the "How many houses?" gaffe, and I wince every time they bring it up as a defense, because it's so non-responsive. What they really should say is, "They're Cindy's houses; John doesn't keep track," which has the dual advantages of being true and brief.

Personally, I'm not going to bash McCain for falling in love with Cindy while he was still married to his first wife. He admits it was a terrible thing to do, and he has treated his wife, and her sons from her previous marriage, with honor as far as I know.

I may be one of the ones who busted Kerry for being a kept man, but McCain's not comparable, IMO. His family was well-off before he ever met Cindy -- and besides, McCain's obviously not into all the trappings of the elite. Kerry didn't marry just one rich woman, he somehow found two and persuaded them to marry him. Besides that, I can never respect John Kerry for the way he testified to all those lies in the Winter Soldier hearings.

Joan, what makes you think McCain's not into the wealth? He's as elite as any guy tripping lightly in $500 Ferragamos. There always seems to be a "but it's different" response when someone points out a similarity between McCain and a Democrat who's taken heat for a similar offense. I don't see the difference. They both married up; they both have been able to maintain their life in politics because the wife had big bucks. I suspect it's just harder to joke about it when it's the guy you're going to vote for, however reluctantly.

But hey, I managed to get through the disappointment of being a Clinton voter and realizing he is personally a nasty piece of work. It can be done.

I must say goodnight, though I've enjoyed the discussions in these wee hours. I've let hurricane avoidance keep me up this late. Now I'm starting to realize that evacuate or stay, we have a lot to do before Gustav comes ashore, wherever that may be. There are already reports of gas stations running out of fuel and I don't want to think about what Walmart or Sam's Club will look like tomorrow.

The relevant issue with McCain/Hagee and Obama/Wright is whether each pastor's insane views will exercise an influence on policy. In the case of Wright, nutty views like the CIA causing AIDS have a 0% chance of influencing an Obama administration's policies.

In the case of Hagee, the view, for example, that the Bible gives Israel to the Jews and that that principle should dominate our foreign policy has a much greater chance of influencing the administration.

The relationships between the candidates and the pastors are different, but different in ways that make McCain/Hagee more dangerous. Obama had a personal and spiritual relationship with Wright; it's quite plausible that they disagree on specific political issues - esp. on Wright's far-out views - although association with the church no doubt helped Obama's rise.

The McCain/Hagee relationship is expressly political so it is far more plausible that Hagee will get something tangible in return for granting the support McCain solicited.

I'm not sure what exactly is being claimed about "black liberation theology" and its relationship to Obama, but I suspect that whatever case is asserted is made up of a relatively small number of scattered, out-of-context fragments that are presented as representative of a very complex phenomenon: the life of a church over several decades with many leaders in various capacities and many, many worshipers. Basically, it's cheap talk in all likelihood.

Oh? Which part of the country are you in charge in? Obama's in charge of half the Illinois Senate delegation. Which of your situations sounds more advanced to you? The "white race" isn't in charge of jack shit. Individual whites, Asians, blacks, Hispanics, et al, are in charge of things.

"Oh", you'll say, "but a higher percentage of blacks are poor or uneducated than are whites". Yes, and? The problem is that PEOPLE are poor and uneducated. Saying "let's help the blacks" is racist. A homeless family needs a home even if they inconveniently happen to be white. That's why normal, non-racist churches focus on "helping the poor" (who are quite often black) rather than taking the black liberation theology approach of "help black people and the other races can go screw". You can't excuse racial discrimination by saying that the people being discriminated against are on average better off than the ones doing the discriminating. Racism is always and in all its forms BAD, no matter how lowly the racists. Although of course Wright and the folks in his church were mostly middle and upper-class in the first place.

I just don't see the lurking menace in the Obama's church history

There'd be no lurking menace in McCain being affiliated with white supremacists, either; the country is, after all, openly hostile to that ideology and he wouldn't dare put it into practice. The reason Barack's membership in the church is relevant is that it indicates that he himself is either an anti-white racist or has no problem associating with them for political advantage. It is a moral issue, like discovering that the Presidential candidate is a pedophile -- even though it isn't likely to affect their job, it tells you that they aren't morally fit for office.

Aside from skin color and the fact that you've only got white guilt about one of the two groups? Not so huge, no.

In any case, now that the race proper is underway, don't you think that will crop up again, if it looks like a useful point of attack for McCain?

Sure. I think it'll do a lot of harm to Obama with white swing voters, since most of us don't share your belief that anti-white racism is no biggie. But I think it would be better if the public learned about Obama's church through actual impartial analysis rather than through 30-second attack ads. What do we even need a news media for if private citizens end up having to do all the journalism?

I know Beth is gone for the night (hope everything goes well in N.O.), but I'm still up...

I don't think McCain is into the trappings of the elite because I've never seen anything to make me think that way. Remember, I've been living in AZ for 14+ years. This post in the Corner today confirmed my opinion. McCain is rich enough to live wherever he chooses, and he chooses Pentagon City? OK then.

Re the shoes: you think he shops for himself, with a wife like Cindy? Please.

Anyway: They both married up; they both have been able to maintain their life in politics because the wife had big bucks. I suspect it's just harder to joke about it when it's the guy you're going to vote for, however reluctantly.

I agree that they both married up. "They were both able to maintain their life in politics because of their wives' money" isn't how I would say it -- certainly McCain's career started with Cindy's money, but as for maintaining it, I think he's done well on his own, although that's just a general impression. Kerry, I have no idea how he's managed to be re-elected so many times, he's never done anything. And yet he managed to be his party's nominee in 2004.

With these two particular guys, it has nothing to do with who gets my vote. It has everything to do with the fact that Kerry is utterly despicable and singularly without accomplishment besides the whole Winter Soldier fiasco. McCain, as far as I can tell, is an arrogant s.o.b. who finds it convenient, for now, to ally himself to the Republican party, while frequently stabbing conservatives in the back or selling them out. There are plenty of issues on which to mock McCain. I just haven't seen Obama's people doing so effectively.

BTW, I do think the Rev. Wright issue will resurface as soon as the Republican convention ends. Most people are unaware that Obama attended a Black Liberation Theology church which denounced "white middle class values" for 20 years. This relationship is much more devastating than the William Ayers stuff. And Zero, assigning greater influence to Hagee over McCain because theirs is a strictly political relationship is spectacularly bizarre. You've got it exactly backwards. Hagee is nothing to McCain; Wright was someone that Obama couldn't denounce right up until he threw the Reverend under the bus.

I've said this before, but I'll repeat: if you think Americans will look at Hagee and Wright and think they cancel each other out, you're nuts. Both men are crazy, sure. Hagee is anti-Catholic. Wright is anti-white and anti-Jew. Even if you could somehow convince people that McCain's brief acceptance of Hagee's support is equivalent to Obama's twenty years with Wright, his book inspired by Wright's sermon, and his inclusion of Wright as a campaign spiritual advisor, you're still stuck with the fact that there are a hell of a lot more whites and Jews in America than there are Catholics -- and, for that matter, a lot more people who agree with Hagee's theology than agree with Wright's.

(they sometimes allow dissenting voices, if one is very focussed and very carefully-written),

You mean if a guy with a huge c@ck and giant brain is writing it. I bypass filters on lefty feminist blogs whenever I want. But the fat, depserate chicks always end up trying to flirt. It's pathetic. Leftist feminist blogs are really just social networking opportunities for women too ugly for match.com or the singles scene.

we live in an age now, especially for women unfortunately, where your sexual appearance is your mark as a person, and where ‘natural beauty’ is merely now categorised as ‘average’.plastic surgery baton rouge

We actually have our surgeries on the same day! I'm a nervous wreck! I'm 30 yr old with 3 kids And I'm having a TT and lipo. My surgery is going to be about 5 hr long. Kinda nervous bout the length but I think it'll be worth it in the end for both of us! Good luck on your surgery!! cosmetic surgery baton rouge